Returning for HIV Test Results: A Systematic Review of Barriers and Facilitators

This systematic review aims to identify factors that facilitate or hinder the return for HIV test results. Four electronic databases were searched. Two independent reviewers selected eligible publications based on inclusion/exclusion criteria. Quantitative studies published since 1985 were included. Thirty-six studies were included in the final review. Individual level barriers included sociodemographic characteristics, such as being a male, of young age and low education level, risk behaviours such as injecting drugs, having multiple sexual partners, and psychosocial factors. Older age, higher education level, being a woman, having high self-esteem, having coping skills, and holding insurance coverage were identified as facilitators. Interpersonal barriers and facilitators were linked to risk behaviours of sexual partners. Contextual barriers included essentially the HIV testing center and its characteristics. This review identified the most important factors that need to be addressed to ensure that people return for their HIV test results.

Factors associated with failure to return for HIV test results in a free and anonymous screening centre

Free and anonymous screening centres (CDAG: Centres de Depistage Anononyme et Gratuit) are public facilities set up for HIV infection diagnosis in France. Some people visiting CDAG fail to return for test results and are not informed of their serology. This study aimed to assess factors associated with failure to return for HIV test results. Patients visiting the Fernand-Widal CDAG (Paris) for an HIV test in January-February 2011 were eligible to take part in the study. Data were collected with an anonymous self-administered questionnaire. Factors associated with failure to return were assessed using logistic regression models. Of the 710 participants (participation rate 88%), 46 patients failed to return. Not specifying birthplace and not living in the region of Paris were associated with failure to return. Those who perceived no risk of HIV infection and those who felt they were more at risk than other people were both statistically associated with failure to return. Self-perceived risk seemed to be of chief concern for failure to return for HIV test results and should be considered during pre-test counselling.

Which gay men would increase their frequency of HIV testing with home self-testing?

Many Australian gay men do not get tested for HIV at the recommended frequency. Barriers to HIV testing may be reduced by the availability of home HIV self-testing (HHST). An online cross-sectional questionnaire was conducted with 2,306 Australian gay men during 2009. Multivariate logistic regression identified factors associated with being likely to increase testing frequency if HHST was available, among previously-tested and never-tested men. Among 2,018 non-HIV-positive men, 83.9% had been tested. Two-thirds indicated they would test more often if HHST was available irrespective of previous testing history. In multivariate analysis, independent predictors of increased testing frequency with HHST included preferences for more convenient testing, not having to see a doctor when testing and wanting immediate results among all men, as well as not being from an Anglo-Australian background and recent unprotected anal sex with casual partners among previously-tested men only. The majority of gay men report that being able to test themselves at home would increase their frequency of HIV testing.

Telephone communication of HIV testing results for improving knowledge of HIV infection status

BACKGROUND

This is one of three Cochrane reviews that examine the role of the telephone in HIV/AIDS services. Both in developed and developing countries there is a large proportion of people who do not know they are infected with HIV. Knowledge of one's own HIV serostatus is necessary to access HIV support, care and treatment and to prevent acquisition or further transmission of HIV. Using telephones instead of face-to-face or other means of HIV test results delivery could lead to more people receiving their HIV test results.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of telephone use for delivery of HIV test results and post-test counselling.To evaluate the effectiveness of delivering HIV test results by telephone, we were interested in whether they can increase the proportion of people who receive their HIV test results and the number of people knowing their HIV status.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, PubMed Central, PsycINFO, ISI Web of Science, Cumulative Index to Nursing & Allied Health (CINAHL), WHOs The Global Health Library and Current Controlled Trials from 1980 to June 2011. We also searched grey literature sources such as Dissertation Abstracts International,CAB Direct Global Health, OpenSIGLE, The Healthcare Management Information Consortium, Google Scholar, Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections, International AIDS Society and AEGIS Education Global Information System, and reference lists of relevant studies for this review.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-randomised controlled trials (qRCTs), controlled before and after studies (CBAs), and interrupted time series (ITS) studies comparing the effectiveness of telephone HIV test results notification and post-test counselling to face-to-face or other ways of HIV test result delivery in people regardless of their demographic characteristics and in all settings.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently searched, screened, assessed study quality and extracted data. A third reviewer resolved any disagreement.

MAIN RESULTS

Out of 14 717 citations, only one study met the inclusion criteria; an RCT conducted on homeless and high-risk youth between September 1998 and October 1999 in Portland, United States. Participants (n=351) were offered counselling and oral HIV testing and were randomised into face-to-face (n=187 participants) and telephone (n=167) notification groups. The telephone notification group had the option of receiving HIV test results either by telephone or face-to-face. Overall, only 48% (n=168) of participants received their HIV test results and post-test counselling. Significantly more participants received their HIV test results in the telephone notification group compared to the face-to-face notification group; 58% (n=106) vs. 37% (n=62) (p < 0.001). In the telephone notification group, the majority of participants who received their HIV test results did so by telephone (88%, n=93). The study could not offer information about the effectiveness of telephone HIV test notification with HIV-positive participants because only two youth tested positive and both were assigned to the face-to-face notification group. The study had a high risk of bias.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found only one eligible study. Although this study showed the use of the telephone for HIV test results notification was more effective than face-to-face delivery, it had a high-risk of bias. The study was conducted about 13 years ago in a high-income country, on a high-risk population, with low HIV prevalence, and the applicability of its results to other settings and contexts is unclear. The study did not provide information about telephone HIV test results notification of HIV positive people since none of the intervention group participants were HIV positive. We found no information about the acceptability of the intervention to patients' and providers', its economic outcomes or potential adverse effects. There is a need for robust evidence from various settings on the effectiveness of telephone use for HIV test results notification.

HIV results: practice at public sexual health clinics in New South Wales

New South Wales (NSW) Health guidelines recommend all HIV results be given in person, however this practice fails to achieve high levels of result collection. Fourteen of all 38 NSW public sexual health clinics (37%) surveyed offer HIV results by telephone to low-risk patients, although all positive results are given in person. Efficiency of result-giving, accessibility to results, patient acceptability and awareness of more flexible national guidelines were cited as reasons for varying practice from state guidelines. NSW guidelines require revision to allow clinicians to determine the most effective and efficient mode of HIV result delivery to their patients.